Discussions on the constructivist mailing list are proving very fruitful - at least I am writing down thoughts I am mulling around. Here another excerpt:
Is a house real? Its constituent parts (cement, bricks)? Does one have to go further down? Is only a completely reductionist account real?
No - all constructions. I propose a minimalist ontology:
There exists a world.
Do not take this sentence literally -> it is an approximation to the unspeakable. To quote from the first verse of the Dao De Jing of Lao Dsi:
“The Dao that can be named is not the eternal Dao.”
It is an assertion of the reality which we are experiencing. All else is a construction, which is true (and therefor knowledge) if it captures aspects of reality relevant for the concrete observer (very related to Nietzsche’s Perpectivism; identical to it? I don’t know yet - have to read and think more :-)).
2 responses so far ↓
1 Eugen // Sep 10, 2007 at 15:35
You have to read Quines Article “On what there is”. its available in “From a logical Viewpoint”.
To quote: A curious thing about the ontological problem is its simplicity, it can be put in three Anglo-Saxon monosyllables:”What is there?” It can be answered, moreover, in a word-”Everything”- and everyone will accept this answer as true.”
It is brilliant in style and content, one of the big highlights in philosophy
also, the article “Two Dogmas of empiricism”, also in FALV should interest you a lot since it is seen as being the foremost reason for the abandonment of the program of logical positivism.
2 guenther // Sep 16, 2007 at 13:07
Dear Eugen,
thanks for your pointers! I am looking forward to reading “On what there is”, maybe I’ll post my thoughts here when I’m done reading.
I’ve already read “Two dogmas of empiricism”, and while I agree that logical positivism is at fault, not necessarily for the reasons Quine addresses. Actually, in his article Quine inadvertently shows much of the absurdity of analytical (language) philosophy - but that is also for another post
Just one thing: both logical positivism and Quine’s position suffer from their anti-realism.
Leave a Comment